The trust “builders” in the technology transfer relationships: an Italian science park experience

Giaretta, Elena

doi:10.1007/s10961-013-9313-z

Cited by 28 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Science parks are also viewed as policy instruments for encouraging regional development, innovation, and the setting up of new firms through networks between higher educational institutions (HEIs) and industry (Hansson et al 2005;T.-S. Hu et al 2005). In particular policy makers see science parks as "meta-organisations", important in the task of getting small and medium-sized enterprises to participate more closely in knowledge creation with universities and research institutions (Giaretta 2013). This underlines the importance of the science park in terms of promoting links with the university, with the aim of making contributions to the regional economy.…”

Section: The Ris-university-science Park Relationship and Its Focus Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work on Region Innovation Systems (RIS) has emphasised the importance of universities. Until recently, however, related insights into the dynamics of this relationship in respect of the specific role of the science park have been limited. This paper presents a systematic review identifying the key roles of each actor in relation to innovation. We link the dynamic roles performed by the university between science parks and the RIS. Our results enable us to identify how the key activities performed by the university change during its interrelations within the RIS and with the science park. Our analysis of the literature distinguishes between three sets of relationships through which the university plays differing roles: RIS-university, RIS-university-science park, and university-science park. Respectively, the University’s relationships between these different RIS actors focuses on: resource sharing, brokerage, and commercialisation-exploitation. Secondly, we find that within each of these relationship types the university can perform three types of roles: on knowledge co-creation, acting as conduit, and inter-organisational relationship building. Distinguishing between these differing relationships and roles enables us to identify a total of nine dynamic roles performed by the University, which include: provision of information, channels of communication, infrastructure, regional networking, building research collaboration, acting as knowledge intermediaries, economic development, technological change and commercialisation processes, and start up creation and commercialisation. The review identifies several gaps in the literature in need of further research, and suggests that university relationships with RIS, interlinked with those between the university and science park itself, are important factors affecting science park innovation performance.

show abstract

Section: The Ris-university-science Park Relationship and Its Focus Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Calcagnini and Favaretto (2016), technology transfer is a complex process based on the interrelation of knowledge and technological resources, both tangible and intangible, such as machines or patents. Although policy makers have been devoting significant resources to technology transfer initiatives, outcomes have been often below expectations due to subjective distance and mistrust between parties (Giaretta, 2014). In this regard, SP has been identified as an interface figure (Salvador and Rolfo, 2011), which may reduce this distance by offering specific services such as technology transfer consulting, intellectual property assistance, innovation management, R&D funding and partnership (Huang et al , 2013; Kim and Jung, 2010; Liberati et al , 2016).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework: the Resource-based Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The instrumentation of science parks: an integrative framework of enabling factors

Meseguer-Martínez

Popa

Soto‐Acosta

2020

JIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeResearch on Science parks (SPs) has attracted a growing interest in the last decades. This widespread innovation policy initiative pursues technology-based industrial and entrepreneurial growth through business development and technology transfer across new and mature firms. Despite the common agreement on SPs' potential benefits, literature have showed mixed results regarding the performance of SPs. To explain this findings, current research pointed out at the lack of a common guiding framework. To cover this knowledge gap, this manuscript proposes an integrative definition and research model together with a multidimensional measurement instrument suitable to encompass the diverse reality of this global phenomenon.Design/methodology/approachBased on a systematic literature review of 281 indexed journal articles published between 1990 and 2018, the paper provides an integrative framework of enabling factors of SPs' performance.FindingsThe results illustrate an integrative conceptual framework of SPs that allows further comparison and generalization of research. At the same time, this manuscript provides valuable insights for managers and entrepreneurs as it conveys a standardized view of SPs' internal context useful for benchmarking.Originality/valueGrounded in the resource-based view (RBV), the paper conducts a thorough literature review to develop an integrative research model featuring three value streams: physical infrastructures, formal links and support services. In addition, a multidimensional measurement tool to operationalize these three dimensions is proposed.

show abstract

“…(Siegel et al, 2004); open dialogue, international acceptance, collaborative attitude, continued relationship, etc. (Kumar and Uruthirapathy, 2007); and trust-generating factors and dialogue-facilitating factors in the TT relationshipstheir reputation of reliability and expertise; high degree of geographic, social, cultural and professional proximity; and informal and personalized nature of the contact (Giaretta, 2014). 2.4.2 Technology transfer offices.…”

Section: Collaboration Success Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for technology transfer success factors: validation for the Graphene4Life project

Chis

Crișan

2020

JSTPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical framework for technology transfer success factors from a technology provider viewpoint and to test this framework considering the perceptions of graphene researchers from a Romanian research project (Graphene4Life). Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a literature review and a case study with three units of analysis. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews and content analysis were used. Findings The five-category framework for technology transfer success factors from a technology provider viewpoint, which portrays success factors in an expansive way from technology to the market (technology, organization, context, collaboration and customer absorptive capacity factors), is confirmed by the qualitative analysis, while new factors in all categories are discovered. Research limitations/implications The results are limited given the qualitative nature of this research. The extrapolation of the results to other technologies and contexts is a scientific challenge. Originality/value In this paper, the authors develop, based on a detailed literature review, a framework for technology success factors from a technology provider viewpoint, which classifies technology transfer success factors in an expansive way from technology to the market (technology, organization, context, collaboration and customer absorptive capacity factors). Technology itself is settled as the foundation of the framework, underlining the need for a technology-driven technology transfer process. In comparison to existing frameworks that analyze technology transfer success factors, the present framework is a more complex one, covering all facets of the technology process. The new factors discovered through the qualitative analysis are also an important contribution of this research.

show abstract

The trust “builders” in the technology transfer relationships: an Italian science park experience

Cited by 28 publications

References 24 publications

Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus

Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus

The instrumentation of science parks: an integrative framework of enabling factors

A framework for technology transfer success factors: validation for the Graphene4Life project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About